Meatwadsprite's Slow Review Thread

Army of Darkness (1 view)



Plot : Starts where the last one left off. Ash is teleported back in time , where he finds he has to fight even more undead creatures to get back to his time.

Story : This is the movie I've been waiting to see since I started watching the Evil Dead trilogy. The long silences and boring suspense are nowhere to be found here. The movie plays out more like an action/comedy and never wastes any time on screen. Instead of the frightened character who was pretty much in the hands of the ghouls , Ash is a complete jerk bad-ass who does whatever he intends to.

Ash is given the task of retrieving the necronomicon , so he can use it to go back to his own time. Armed with his chainsaw arm and shotgun - he plows right through the monsters , until he accidentally unleashes the army of darkness. From this point , it turns into an all out war of humans versus skeleton zombies.

Visuals : Tons of incredibly energetic camera work and hard hitting action scenes allow this movie to deliver where it counts the most. Thanks to the camera work , the special effects cease to fall into the cheesy category of the first two and the clay animation almost doesn't look dumb.

Synopsis : A great mixture of comedy , horror , and action. Ash is such a hilarious and cool character in this one , this has easily become one of my favorite movies.

__________________

Meatwad, that Ackbar stuff is funny.

__________________

thanks

Wall-E (1 view)



Plot : Set in a future where earth has been deserted by the humans. Wall-E is one of the many robots of his kind to clean up the earth while the humans are gone. Though by the time you are introduced to him - he is the last one on earth.

Story : This movie right away flies though existential themes of human intelligence versus artificial intelligence , but that's not the focus of the story. Wall-E has become curious about the world around him and stops his duty of compacting trash , to explore what interesting things he finds among the trash. Though about half way in he encounters another robot , Eve - who he becomes instantly attached to. Eve is called back to the human ship to complete her task and Wall-E is brought along.

This is where the whole other half of the movie is located. Wall-E is brought aboard the gigantic space-ship where all humans now live. The lives of the futuristic humans uses technology for pretty much everything and their whole existence is pretty much in the hands of the gigantic B and E corporation.

That's all I'll tell you about what happens in the story. Now if your just wondering if this is for adults or children - I think persons of any age can enjoy this movie a ton. It presents it's themes of corporate power and "virtual" life in a very neutral manner - leaving it up to the viewer to decide what is right and wrong : which very little animated films of today do. The story telling moves with patience in some parts and rapid speed at others - all of it which couldn't be done better.

Visuals : CGI films with talking animals and such have become so abundant recently - most of them being made very fast and not much detail being put into their 3D characters and environments. Last year Pixar totally blew all CGI animated films out the water with Ratatouille and now they have blown me away again.

Both the dirty/desolate earth and the squeaky clean/automated space-ship provide enough eye candy that you could practically any frame out of this entire movie and frame it on your wall as piece of amazing art.

Synopsis : A gigantic achievement in film making !

I'm always a little surprised when I see a animation that's done poorly. There's so much pre-production that goes into them you'd figure they could see a potential problem and fix it, versus making a documentary or something.

That's if they care about the story, or if they are trying to cash in on a current trend.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I think that's a part of the problem, but mainly I think it comes down to being unable to execute an idea.

A History of Violence (2 views)



A History of Violence is an adaptation of the graphic novel of the same name. Now the only two well made graphic novel films I've seen so far are Sin City and 300 - both a showcase for great CGI and graphic violence. The violence in this movie though is the main theme and it's about as cheesy as the actors in it.

This was the first Cronenberg film I had seen at the time and I actually did like it when I first watched it , but my recent second viewing has me laughing at my film taste when I was younger.

The movie revolves around Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) and his family. Tom Stall appears to have a perfectly routine life , running his restaurant. Until one day his restaurant is robbed by two men who threaten Tom until he disarms and kills them both. Stall becomes a heroic icon in his small town which unfortunately draws attention to him from a bad time in his mysterious past.

Now there is an original idea for a story underneath the horrible dialogue and character development. There were so many points of the movie I just wanted to turn it off , because I didn't care at all about it's one sided characters. Somehow I got to the end of the film and this only made me more mad. I felt like something just stole two hours of my life and I won't be getting it back.

I still can't give this movie a 0 out of 5 though , because it's base story is such a good idea - it's just executed horribly in all departments.



Sadly I found out after watching Videodrome recently (which I really enjoyed) that this is was directed by him.

I concur. What made my sole viewing of History even worse was that the DVD was badly damaged that it kept skipping over bits and I had to clean the disc a few times in order to catch enough of it. When I have to put all that effort in, the movie better be worth it. Unfortuantely it wasn't.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

You guys can go ahead and not worry, be happy, but I hope that in the not too distant future, you actually find a way to give ratings which don't jump around so much (both up and down), without rhyme and reason. I certainly thought that The History of Violence was worth watching, and I mean that as a movie and not a graphic movie adaptation. I'm apparently one of the few viewers who grade movies as objectively as possible without any preconceived ideas or concerns about the history of the project or even the writer/director. Then again, I WILL plead guilty as far as Spielberg goes. I undoubtedly overrate his films, but others overrate those they believe to be cool, whether or not they are.

I will say that I'm 100% sure that The History of Violence is better than Eastern Promises, so maybe the latter flick is worth a

By the way, I believe Videodrome is worse than these other two flicks, so I must really be a trainwreck.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

History of violence is Mr Cronenberg's CV’s crème de la crème … it was so much better than his other films. I didn’t realise it was one of his… till of course Viggo nails Maria on the stairs in a creepy Cronenberg kind of way… Eastern promises continued the good form but Ms Watts was wet and pathetic with a dreadful British accent.

Worse Croneburg film off all time is of course Naked Lunch. He slaughtered a literally masterpiece and made it all alieny and s***t.

I assume with that first remark you mean Meatwad. As stated, I've seen History once and did not like it at all. I would not give it anything higher than a and even then I'm being generous. I can't really imagine watching it in "the not too distant future" and thinking "Wow, I was wrong. This really is quite a good film?"

Keep in mind, I tried to like it, but I'm sorry, it's just not that good. Eastern Promises I liked slightly better, but that's not saying much.

For the record, the only other Cronenberg I've seen in full is Scanners, and I guess that's the closest I get to a favourite film of his. On the surface, he seems like the kind of director whose work I should appreciate, but for some reason I just can't get into his stuff.

Whether that's my loss or my gain, I don't know.

Weird, because from what I've read of Naked Lunch (which is roughly the first third), it is "alieny and s**t". Plus, it was not meant to be a straight adaptation of the book, but rather a collection of Burroughs' work and even parts of Burroughs' life story.

I don't see how I'm rating it with any preconceived ideas. Aside from thinking that it might be good while I'm watching it.

***** movies are *****, whether people love them or not. Didn't you get the memo?

Maybe I misunderstood. I thought you used to like it, and now you don't. Maybe you had no ideas the first time, but you would have thought you liked it going into the next time, wouldn't you?

I did like it the first time , but that was back when I liked stuff like Scary Movie 3 and The Punisher.

I claim no responsibilty in those cases.

I saw it at the movies, i didn't hate it I didn't love it not interested in seeing it again

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

Well it skipped out the talking a*** hole and the gay orgies, but i guess we got sci-fi aliens, well lots of them.. a whole movie of them... also stick with the book, i know its odd to read, but its worth it for its sheer madness...